Senior Advocate Saurabh Soparkar Discusses Arbitration Challenges
Senior Advocate Saurabh Soparkar, a prominent figure in the Gujarat legal community, is known for his extensive practice before the Gujarat High Court, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), and the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) in Ahmedabad. With a reputation as a leading authority on tax law, Soparkar has served as Standing Counsel for the Income Tax Department and has taught Corporate Tax Planning and Legal Aspects of Business at IIM Ahmedabad for over two decades. He also serves on the board of the Gujarat High Court Arbitration Centre (GHAC), where he simplifies complex legal topics for broader audiences.
In an interview with Bar & Bench’s Neha Joshi, conducted during the GHAC Arbitration Week at GIFT City, Gandhinagar, Soparkar shared his insights on institutional arbitration, judicial delays, and tax indemnities. Below are the key points from the discussion.
Transition from Ad Hoc to Institutional Arbitration
Neha Joshi (NJ) inquired about the readiness of the Gujarat Bar and corporate sector for institutional arbitration. Saurabh Soparkar (SS) emphasized the need to raise awareness about institutional arbitration, as many businesses remain unaware of its existence, often defaulting to ad hoc arbitration. He highlighted the importance of providing top-notch arbitration facilities and speedy resolutions to encourage a shift from ad hoc to institutional arbitration.
The Role of the Gujarat High Court in GHAC
NJ asked about the credibility and independence of GHAC given its association with the Gujarat High Court. Soparkar explained that while GHAC is closely linked with the High Court to establish credibility, it operates independently. Over time, GHAC aims to build its own reputation, eventually being recognized as a standalone institution.
Leveraging GIFT City for International Arbitration
Soparkar acknowledged that GHAC is not yet ready to compete with international arbitration centers. The focus is on inviting experienced arbitrators and building a credible system to attract more cases. He noted that increased workload and credibility would mutually reinforce each other, helping GHAC gain momentum.
More Read
Addressing Arbitration Delays
Discussing the issue of judicial pendency, Soparkar highlighted the challenges faced at the Section 34 level, where district judges are overburdened. He noted that Chief Justice Sunita Agarwal’s proactive handling of Section 37 matters at the Gujarat High Court has mitigated delays at that level but emphasized the need for dedicated time to clear Section 34 backlogs.
Enforcement and Procedural Discipline
Soparkar pointed out the difficulties in enforcing arbitral awards due to overburdened executing courts and suggested that Section 9 proceedings should be prioritized post-award. He criticized Section 29A for failing to enforce strict timelines and called for arbitrators to take a firmer stance against unnecessary adjournments.
Expanding the Arbitrator Pool and Tax Arbitration
On the topic of arbitrator conflicts, Soparkar proposed expanding the pool to include practicing lawyers, which would reduce conflicts of interest. He expressed skepticism about the feasibility of arbitrating tax disputes, noting governmental reluctance to relinquish control over tax adjudication to arbitrators.
More Read
Promoting Arbitration in Gujarat
Finally, Soparkar urged for a reversal of the government’s decision to exclude arbitration clauses in commercial construction contracts to encourage arbitration in commercial disputes. He expressed optimism about the future of arbitration in Gujarat and anticipated significant progress in the coming years.
